Dion will never be a friend of the Canadian military

I came across an interesting article, Dion will never be a pal of soldiers, by Peter Worthington in the Toronto Sun. The main premise is that the CAF would be reduced to its previous depleted strength with their role and capabilities severely limited, as it was during the Trudeau years, if Dion was to become Prime Minister.

In his press conference on leaving Afghanistan, Dion seemed to think our role should consist of turning soldiers into social workers -- no more seek and destroy stuff our troops have been doing so effectively.

Instead he wants our troops building schools, enhancing women's rights, digging wells for fresh water, training and assisting local communities. Silly ass. What escapes Dion's limited comprehension is that our troops have been doing all this social work stuff from day one, as well as kicking butt of the Taliban.

By his actions since becoming leader of the opposition, Dion has not helped to overcome this perception. In his news conferences and statements in parliament, he is almost always very critical of the military.

Dion and members of his caucus had a field day last Spring defending the words of murderous Taliban thugs, who would not have a second thought about killing women and children, when they were making allegations of torture and mistreatment, as instructed in their training manuals. Other members of the Liberal caucus did their best to smear our military, by trying to make them appear as incompetent violators of human rights in Afghanistan, when all they were doing was fulfilling an agreement involving prisoner transfer that was made while the previous Liberal party was in power.

In a May 27, 2005 letter from Graham to Martin, the former prime minister was told that Canada planned to negotiate an agreement with the Afghan government that would spell out "explicit undertakings" on how the detainees would be treated.

The same day as the letter, Graham "authorized the Canadian Forces to seek arrangements with relevant authorities on the transfer of detainees," according to a Defence Department briefing note.

The other thing that Dion and his Liberal caucus does not seem to be able to understand is that our military needs good equipment and military hardware to be able to carry out its duties effectively, wherever they are deployed. For many years under previous governments, they were forced to operate using sub-standard equipment, which was badly in need of being replaced. A good example of this are the sea king helicopters, which are over 40 years old and require several hours of maintenance for every hour they are in the air.

When Prime Minister Harper announced increased spending for the military to upgrade its equipment, including replacing the ageing sea king helicopters, Dion and members of his caucus were all over him, condemning him and his party for doing what was desperately needed for many years.

... the Opposition is accusing Harper of an American-style defence buildup that seems "more attuned to offensive warfare" than peacekeeping.

"We have a prime minister who has George W. Bush as American Idol," Liberal Leader Stephane Dion said.

Then there is the lack of appreciation for the CAF. You almost never hear Dion utter words of support for our military. It’s mind boggling, especially since many of them are risking their lives everyday in hostile environments and are serving our country honourably.

The problem with Dion is that he never seems to be able to think things through before opening his mouth to make ridiculous statements. He does not seem to have a firm grasp on world affairs, as was evidently displayed by his gaffe on Pakistan.

He needs to realize that he is the leader of the Opposition and not a university professor anymore. In university, one can make all kind of wild theories and hold utopian world views, as they will never be required to implement it. In the real world things are different. It is a very rough place people full of people who would not give a second thought about destroying our way of life.

Dion also needs to realize that in order to have development in Afghanistan's Kandahar region, including construction of new schools, digging wells and other infrastructure, security is required. Security is needed because this work is being done in Taliban territory and our soldiers and other aid workers would be sitting ducks without a strong military on the ground to thwart any Taliban attack and to proactively remove any pending Taliban threat to the community. That is why we need to ensure that our military is strong, has the necessary equipment and our full support when we deploy them in hostile territories.

Jack Layton - Prime Minister Harper's Economic Policies are Hurting the Middle class

NDP leader, Jack Layton never seems to quit amazing me with his ill-informed statements. At the NDP leaders summit meeting, he accused Prime Minister Stephen Harper of mismanaging the economy by cutting taxes and allowing market forces to prevail without government intervention. He also said that the Prime Minister’s economic policies are hurting the middle class.

OTTAWA - Prime Minister Stephen Harper is mismanaging the economy and hurting middle-class Canadians, New Democratic Party Leader Jack Layton charged Sunday as his party began its first ever summit meeting of NDP leaders from across the country.

Speaking to reporters, Layton gave a glimpse of what could very well be a key plank in the NDP's platform heading into the next election, painting his party as better stewards of the economy than the Conservatives who tend to favour letting market forces prevail with little government intervention.

One thing that seems to becoming very clear is that the NDP does not believe that leaving more money in people’s pockets instead of the government coffers is a good thing. They want Canada to follow the policy of overtaxing its population to pay for new government programs that would supposedly help the marginalized in our society. In most cases, the new tax money never reaches these people, but just ends up in the government coffers to fund a new bureaucracy.

"We believe that Mr. Harper has been reckless in the way that he has approached financial matters."

For example, the Conservatives bring in tax cuts that help industries already doing well such as banks and oil companies, allowing them to make even greater profits, Layton argued. Meanwhile, high oil prices are fuelling the high dollar which is hitting other industries such as manufacturing, forestry and agriculture.

Nor is it about to get better, Layton predicted.

The NDP seems to believe it is a bad thing when there are industries in the Canadian economy that are doing well. To them an industry that is making too much profit is a bad thing. What is also quite surprising is that the NDP is talking about how Harper’s policies are hurting manufacturing, forestry and agriculture. But if we examine some of the central planks in the NDP’s policy; they will have an even more devastating effect on these industries.

The NDP wants the government to implement the Kyoto accord and carbon taxes immediately to reduce CO2 emissions. The effect of this would immediately have an effect on gas prices and industry through increased costs at a much higher rate than presently exists.

The NDP complains about the middle class being squeezed by the Harper government, but the NDP’s policy of higher taxation and immediately implementing the Kyoto accord will result in industry being forced to charge higher prices for its products, which will only serve to further squeeze the poor and middle class that are trying to make ends meet. It will also mean less manufacturing jobs and more layoffs, especially if the cost of goods and raw materials increase as a result of higher taxes and being forced to immediately comply with the Kyoto accord.

The other thing that the NDP fails to admit is that higher taxation, which they favour, and government interference in the market in a majority of cases hurts more than it helps. It causes capital flight and investor uncertainty, which in the end results in less money being invested in our country and less jobs for our citizens. It is these socialist policies that have sunk the economies of several countries in the third world.

"Now we're seeing the members of Parliament being blackmailed by Mr. Harper saying that the only way there will be any assistance to the laid off workers is if we vote confidence in the Harper government and their approach to all things."

It quite amazing that Mr. Layton, who forced former Liberal Prime Minister, Paul Martin’s hand in supporting billions of dollars increased spending on government programs and canceling corporate taxes as his price for supporting the 2005 federal budget is now accusing the Conservatives of blackmail, when they link $1-billion in economic assistance to the passage of their next budget.

Mr. Layton can afford to make these statements because his party right now does not have a reasonable chance of forming the government in the near future, so he will never have to be accountable for them.

Dion Finally Makes an Appearance in Afghanistan with Igniatieff

Opposition leader Stephane Dion has finally made the trip to Afghanistan, along with Liberal MP, Michael Igniatieff, after promising to do so for many months. According to them, they are on a fact finding mission to set long term goals for Canada’s mission in Afghanistan. This is after they have already decided that the Liberal party’s position is to end Canada’s mission to Afghanistan in 2009.

Dion meets with Karzai in Afghanistan (Natioanl Post)

The thing I find the most disingenuous is the acknowledgement from Mr. Dion that Afghan President Karzai appreciates all the work and support that Canadian troops have given his country, while speaking to reporters in Kabul.

"The president has been very thankful for everything Canadians are doing," Mr. Dion said, during his first trip to Afghanistan as Liberal leader. "Obviously, all our interlocutors would like Canada to be more involved in everything."

In parliament or in his many press conferences, Mr Dion never once seem to be able to express this acknowledgement. Instead it has been focused on the alleged mistreatment of Taliban detainees and being critical of the agreement covering the monitoring of prisoners handed over to the Afghan government by Canadian troops.

What I find interesting is the following:

Although Mr. Ignatieff previously had been a vocal proponent of Canada's military role in Kandahar -- to the point of voting in 2006 to extend the mission by two years - - he echoed the Liberal party line: Canadian soldiers would be able to use force to protect themselves and construction projects undertaken by Canada in Afghanistan, but they would no longer be able to go on the offensive against insurgents.

"If you are under attack you can defend yourself," Mr. Dion said.

Mr. Ignatieff added: "We understand you can't do development without the security."

Mr Dion and Mr. Igniatieff do not seem to see to understand the situation in Kandahar province very well. It is the region in Afghanistan where the Taliban are most active and without these periodic offenses against them, the Taliban would be able to mass their insurgents without any fear of being attacked and threaten even more towns and villages and Canadian troops in coordinated attacks.

In other words, the Canadian soldiers would become sitting ducks, waiting for the next Taliban attack instead of taking the proactive approach of removing the Taliban threat before it is able to attack them. This would mean that even less construction projects will be able to be implemented without being disrupted by Taliban insurgents.

Because of the effectiveness of the Canadian troops and other NATO allies in such offenses, the Taliban have been largely reduced to “hit and run” attacks. If you look at most of the causalities among Canadian troops, it is not from military offences, but from roadside bombings. If we do allow the Taliban insurgents to freely roam around Kandahar without the fear of being challenged, the casualities among NATO allies will not go down, but will most certainly increase.

Hopefully good sense will prevail during the next parliamentary vote on the Afghan mission, but with the NDP and Bloc already opposed, the chances of this happening looks pretty bleak.

Obama opens double-digit lead over Clinton just 2 days ahead of the New Hampshire primary

During the last couple of days, I have been watching the US Presidential race for the Republican and Democrat nominees. The Democrat race has been a very interesting one and I have often found myself being glued to the TV, while closely following the latest events in what has become a very captivating race for the presidential nomination.

In the beginning New York Senator Hillary Clinton was the frontrunner and one to beat, and was significantly ahead of Illinois Senator, Barack Obama and former North Carolina Senator, John Edwards. But now the tables have turned. Senator Obama has not only won the Iowa caucus, but has now surged ahead of Senator Clinton in popularity in New Hampshire, with only 2 days to go before the New Hampshire primary.

Current poll numbers:

Democrats - Barack Obama 39%, Hillary Clinton 29%, John Edwards 16%.
This is interesting because just a few days ago both Obama and Clinton were tied at 33%

Republicans – John McCain 32%, Mitt Romney 26%, Mike Huckabee 14%

The other thing that is also interesting is the electability issue among Democrat Presidential candidates. In December 45% thought that Clinton had the best chance of beating the GOP nominee. Now barely a few weeks later, the polls has changed with 42% thinking that Obama has the best chance of beating the GOP nominee, compared to 31% for Clinton.

Clearly the Clinton camp needs to rethink their campaign strategy. She does not seem to be able to connect with the average American voter and that is hurting her. Many think that she often talks above her constituents and gives an aura of her superiority to everyone else. They cannot seem to relate to her.

Obama on the other hand is able to connect with the average constituents with his message of hope that is resonating with younger voters and other demographics as well. He also emphasizes the hard work and obstacles that he overcame that has allowed him to rise from very humble beginnings to being elected as a Senator for Illinois. Many of his constituents can relate to that and see him as one of their own. This has allowed him to surge to the top. It will be interesting to see how these candidates end up once the race is finished.

Another Tory Election Promise fulfilled: PM kicks off final GST cut at electronics store

Yesterday Prime Minister, Stephen Harper and Finance Minister, Jim Flaherty announced the reduction of the goods and service tax (GST) from six percent to five percent at an electronics store in Mississauga.

This was the same store where Harper, in 2005, while leader of the Opposition had promised Canadians that a Conservative government would reduce the GST from its then rate of seven percent to five percent by 2011. Today this reduction comes into effect, more than 3 years ahead of schedule.

Article from CTV: PM kicks off final GST cut at electronics store

What really irks me is the people who have been openly dismissive of this tax reduction.

Many critics and economists say that the GST cut is bad economics, and less effective than other tax cut options. Others believe the cut will disproportionately benefit wealthy people who make more expensive purchases.

When the GST was first introduced, many of these same critics were complaining about how much of a burden this tax would be on the poor. Well if this tax is a burden on the poor, then it would follow that a reduction of the same tax would be a relief on the poor, right? So how is this bad economics? How is having more money left in my pocket to save or spend on things I need bad economics? It is amazing how those critics of the government reverse their position to suit their needs!

What is really funny is that the same Liberal party that vowed to abolish this tax when they came into office never followed through on that promise and now have the gall to criticize the Conservative government for reducing the same tax. It does not make any sense.

What we need is more good government and sound economic policies from the Conservative government. Hopefully they will be given a mandate in the next federal elections to do just that.

Happy New Year everyone and best wishes for 2008!

Regards,

Tony